Send tips to Curtis Black, Newstips Editor
NEWSTIPS HOME | About | Follow on Twitter @ChicagoNewstips

Pullman split on Wal-Mart

With a proposed Wal-Mart in Pullman on the agenda for Wednesday’s zoning committee meeting, public opinion in the community remains divided, as an unsuccessful effort to  win an endorsement by the Pullman Civic Organization shows.

It was only a week and a half ago, at a meeting of the civic group, that residents learned that Wal-Mart has signed a tentative agreement to anchor Pullman Park, a massive development project south of 104th Street and west of the Bishop Ford Expressway.

At the end of a long meeting, a vote in favor of the project was moved, but Wal-Mart skeptics won a vote to postpone a decision.

Buses are being provided for residents who support the Wal-Mart to come downtown for the zoning meeting en masse.

But some Pullman residents are asking how well the project has been marketed to other retailers, why economic development assistance isn’t flowing to small businesses in the area, and whether the rush to close a deal will foreclose an opportunity to impact Wal-Mart’s employment policies.

“They say nobody else is going to come but Wal-Mart, and we’d better take it or we won’t get anything,” said longtime Pullman resident Tom Shepherd.  “Why don’t we try a little harder?”

Developers have said that Jewel, Dominick’s, Target, Costco, and Ikea have turned down the spot.  But spokespersons for several of the companies told the Chicago Reader last week that they hadn’t been contacted.

David Doig of the Chicago Neighborhood Initiative told the Reader he’d worked through brokers, though reports on those contacts weren’t provided.  Alderman Anthony Beale told the Reader that he’d contacted retailers about a development at 115th and Michigan and assumed that if they turned that down, they wouldn’t be interested in Pullman Park.

Resident Ellen Garza would prefer to patronize small businesses, and thinks economic development should support that sector.  “Beale has done nothing for small business,” she said, mentioning commercial strips along 115th and 111th where “small businesses are limping along.”

“Where’s the economic development that would promote them and help them grow?” she asks, arguing that “small businesses help the community, make the community richer.” [Newstips explored this issue in 2006.]

Garza objects to the argument that any job is a good job, especially in economically-depressed minority areas. “Why are African Americans always treated like second-class citizens?” she asked.  “They don’t need unions, they don’t need a living wage, they don’t need benefits – it’s racist.”

“I think it’s a terrible idea to have a Wal-Mart in our neighborhood,” she said, calling the company “the worst employer on the face of the earth.”

Another resident, Jeff Helgeson, says Chicago has an opportunity to influence Wal-Mart. The company is “not a lost cause,” he said.  “They have changed – they stopped locking employees in their stores overnight, for example – and they did that in response to public pressure.”

“If they want to come into this market, they need to be kept to Chicago standards, not bring Chicago down to the level of other places,” he adds.  He’s afraid that “we might be giving in at a moment when we have some leverage.”

It’s been a long haul for the Pullman Park proposal since Park National Bank acquired the old Ryerson Steel site for $24 million in 2008.  A series of meetings seeking community input for development plans were held; PNB talked about building 1,000 single-family homes in keeping with the architecture of the Pullman Historic District, along with big box and smaller retail, a hotel, senior housing and a community center.

But the bank was seized by the FDIC last October and sold off to U.S. Bank, the nation’s sixth largest bank.  Not until this March did U.S. Bank announce that the PNB’s development efforts would be spun off in the Chicago Neighborhood Initiative.

“Park National Bank was really responsive to the community,” says Helgeson. “They were trying to do it without going to Wal-Mart. When U.S. Bank came in, suddenly Wal-Mart is the only option.”

Also subject to change is the financing of the project.  Before U.S. Bank and Wal-Mart, city financing through a new TIF zone passed last summer was said to be crucial to the feasibility of the project.  Now, according to residents who attended the presentation at the PCO meeting, developers say that phase one of the project – building the Wal-Mart store – will only use private funds.

This could avoid getting the project tangled up in the Finance Committee – or, perhaps, coming under the sway of a proposed ordinance that would require that beneficiaries of city subsidies pay a living wage.  Wal-Mart has consistently rejected such a requirement.

Print this Post Print this Post

Category: development, Pullman, retail, Wal-Mart


3 Responses

  1. Drew says:

    Your Lead line is incorrect. A vote to support or not support the project was tabled after hours of discussion. Also missing was the announcement that the Board of Directors had voted unanimously to support the project, also announced at the April meeting.

    One of the reasons our meeting ran so long in April was that Ms. Garza and Mr. Sheppard brought in anti Wal-Mart speakers who all had to speak against the project, and who tried to negate comments form actual Pullman residents, at our “town Hall” meeting where we wanted to hear how our community felt.

    It is also incorrect that our April meeting was the first we had heard about Wal-Mart. Park Bank Initiatives mentioned them as the anchor store at our February meeting, where both Ms. Garza and Mr. Sheppard were present.

    No one quoted in the article, or who spoke at the city council meeting, had any authority to speak for the Pullman Civic Organization, and they hold no office except as general members.

    Drew Sexton – President
    Pullman Civic Organization

  2. Curtis says:

    As the article makes clear, the effort to win an endorsement by the Pullman Civic Organization was unsuccessful when the motion to support the project was moved and members who still had questions, and those who oppose Wal-Mart’s role, won a vote to postone a decision.

    The article doesn’t say that meeting was “the first we had heard about Wal-Mart.” It was the first community meeting after the news that Wal-Mart has signed an agreement to anchor the Pullman Park development became public.

  3. Maxine says:

    I think a wal-mart would be great, what small business are they talking about the one’s on Michigan. Please have they really looked at those small businesses. I wouldn’t shop at none of those stores. Roseland/Pullman isn’t what it was some forty years ago. Starting in 1970 Roseland/Pullman business starting going down. The business is not any thing to talk about or to shop at. Most are Arams and chineses owners that make their money and take it back to their own neighborhoodm we don’t see any thing from the business but poor merchandise. You go over to 119th and the Dan Ryan and you see how nice they build the business over their We want that in Roseland. The people that trying to stop this I bet they don’t live in Roseland and they don’t care about our neighborhood and jobs.

Get Newstips in Your Inbox!

Enter your email address:

Subscribe in a reader






CAN TV is a network that belongs to the people of Chicago.  For updates on local programs, and live, timely coverage of community events, sign up at